Evidence that Craig Wright might be Satoshi after all

[aerobatic]

This is The Satoshi Affair, by Andrew O'Hagan at London Review of Books.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n13/andrew-ohagan/the-satoshi-affair


edit: Thread renamed after suggestions from the forum

[1714249289]

1714249289

[1714249289]

1714249289

[1714249289]

1714249289

[1714249289]

1714249289

[jbreher]

Hmm. You may have had more activity if you entitled your post "Evidence of Wright maybe being Satoshi" or some such.

<I found it a compelling read...>

[franky1]

nice bit of "fly on the wall" fiction. loosly based on craig wrights actual life story.
obviously a story wrote by craig. as the story is not wrote via gathering evidence/research. EG (running around the hotel room and hallways) is not something an outsider would know or be able to find out just by reading news papers or police records

im guessing craig wants to now make a movie deal, after ofcourse a book deal.
kind of a shame that he is trying to glorify himself as satoshi, purely with the hope that it would free him of the tax/grant fraud he perpetrated. aswell as the scam he done on the canadian company (amungst others).

it made me laugh half way through reading it when it said at one part that craig was completely surprised at the press coverage. yet a couple weeks before, it was him contacting lots of news sources offering the "complete rights" and exclusives to his own fiction.

anyways good luck to craig in the entertainment industry. but craig definetly isnt satoshi, oops i think that would have been a spoiler for the sequal that i just revealed, sorry.

im just waiting now for the revelation of when nick szabo was the first person to talk and introduce craig months before at a conference.. where nick set the scene to start off the misdirection

[aerobatic]

Hmm. You may have had more activity if you entitled your post "Evidence of Wright maybe being Satoshi" or some such.

<I found it a compelling read...>

agreed. and done.

[aerobatic]

more details here...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36575524

and here

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bitcoin-wright-patents-idUSKCN0Z61GM


and here's 51 patents that he's filed (at EITC) that are published so far.  The reuters article says hundreds are being filed...



IPOGOV UK Links :
Intellectual Property Office
Searchable Patents Journal
Search details
From to           Search details help
Refine    Results per page  
  
UK applications filed
UK applications published
UK applications granted
EP/UK patents
UK ceased expired and terminated
Other proceedings
SPCs
Corrections
Help on this tabSort By
PagePrevious1Next
Publication
Date   Application
Number   Details
Rows may repeat to show multiple inventors or applicants depending on "Sort By"
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603112.2   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Blockchain implemented counting system and method for use in secure voting and distribution
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603114.8   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Agent-based turing complete transactions integrating feedback within a blockchain system
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603117.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Determining a common secret for two blockchain nodes for the secure exchange of information
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603118.9   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Reactive and pre-emptive security system based on choice theory
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603122.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Personal device security using cryptocurrency wallets
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603123.9   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: P2P cryptocurrency exchange with tokenisation
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
06 April 2016
(Journal 6620)   GB1603125.4   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Universal tokenisation system for blockchain based cryptocurrencies
Date Lodged: 23 February 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604219.4   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Enhanced blockchain architecture and protocol that leads to the infinite scaling of payment networks in real time for bitcoin with segregated merchant markets
Date Lodged: 11 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604225.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Method and system for the efficient transfer of tokens on a blockchain based on a codification process
Date Lodged: 11 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604227.7   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Authorisation method and system for the transfer of tokens on a blockchain and the redemption of contracts in web of trust
Date Lodged: 11 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604244.2   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Methods and systems for efficient transfer of entities on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger using the blockchain
Date Lodged: 11 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604493.5   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Methods and systems for efficient transfer of entities on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger using the blockchain
Date Lodged: 16 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604495.0   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Method and system for efficient transfer of cryptocurrency associated with a payroll on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger that leads to a automated payroll
Date Lodged: 16 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604497.6   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Method and system for generating records of entities on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger that can be used in the creation of a blockchain complete based
Date Lodged: 16 March 2016
27 April 2016
(Journal 6623)   GB1604498.4   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Method and system for efficient determination of transfers of entities on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger that can be used to provide a consolidated block
Date Lodged: 16 March 2016
11 May 2016
(Journal 6625)   GB1605026.2   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Secure multiparty loss resistant storage and transfer of cryptographic keys for blockchain based systems in conjunction with a wallet management system
Date Lodged: 24 March 2016
11 May 2016
(Journal 6625)   GB1605032.0   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Recording multiple transactions on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger
Date Lodged: 24 March 2016
18 May 2016
(Journal 6626)   GB1605571.7   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Registry and automated management method for blockchain-enforced smart contracts
Date Lodged: 1 April 2016
25 May 2016
(Journal 6627)   GB1606062.6   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: A method for secure peer-to-peer lending on a blockchain
Date Lodged: 11 April 2016
25 May 2016
(Journal 6627)   GB1606065.9   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Computer-implemented methods and systems for validating tokens for block chain based cryptocurrencies
Date Lodged: 11 April 2016
25 May 2016
(Journal 6627)   GB1606066.7   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: A method of performing symmetric fair-exchange transactions
Date Lodged: 11 April 2016
25 May 2016
(Journal 6627)   GB1606067.5   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: A method for secure peer-to-peer lending on a blockchain
Date Lodged: 11 April 2016
01 June 2016
(Journal 6628)   GB1606630.0   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: System and method for controlling asset-related payments via a blockchain
Date Lodged: 15 April 2016
08 June 2016
(Journal 6629)   GB1607058.3   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: A method and system for securing computer software using a distributed hash table and a peer-to-peer distributed ledger
Date Lodged: 22 April 2016
08 June 2016
(Journal 6629)   GB1607063.3   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: A method and system for the transfer of entities
Date Lodged: 22 April 2016
08 June 2016
(Journal 6629)   GB1607249.8   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Tokenisation method and system for implementing non-debt related exchanges on a blockchain
Date Lodged: 26 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607472.6   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607476.7   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Operating system for blockchain IOT devices
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607477.5   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: A method and system for controlling the performance of a contract using a distributed hash table and a peer to peer distributed ledger
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607482.5   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Methods and systems for efficient transfer of entities on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
Parent Filing Date: 16 March 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607483.3   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Methods and systems for the efficient transfer of entities on a peer-to-peer distributed ledger
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
Parent Filing Date: 11 March 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607484.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Payment and distribution of digital content
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607520.2   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607525.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607527.7   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607529.3   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607530.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607537.6   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607538.4   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607539.2   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607541.8   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607552.5   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607553.3   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607554.1   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607555.8   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing loic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607558.2   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607561.6   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607564.0   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607566.5   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607569.9   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
15 June 2016
(Journal 6630)   GB1607584.8   Applicant: EITC Holdings Limited
Title: Implementing logic gate functionality using a blockchain
Date Lodged: 29 April 2016
Page 1 of 1 (51 hits)PagePrevious1Next
Tell us about a problem

DisclaimerCrown CopyrightPrivacy and cookiesIntellectual Property Office is an operating name of the Patent Office



https://tmoffices.eu/types/patent/p-os/p-journal/p-pj?startYear=2015&startMonth=January&startDay=28th+-+6558&endYear=2016&endMonth=June&endDay=15th+-+6630&filter=EITC+&perPage=100&sort=Publication+Date

[thejaytiesto]

This is 0 evidence. In fact in the bbc article they admit at the end that this is basically more mental masturbation about the whole thing.
Was Craig Wright involved in the early Bitcoin days? Sure. Does this mean he is Satoshi, nope.
Hal Finney, David Kleiman and Nick Szabo to name some, are still more accurate candidates.

[Mr Felt]

This is 0 evidence. In fact in the bbc article they admit at the end that this is basically more mental masturbation about the whole thing.
Was Craig Wright involved in the early Bitcoin days? Sure. Does this mean he is Satoshi, nope.
Hal Finney, David Kleiman and Nick Szabo to name some, are still more accurate candidates.

Correct. Well, tbf, I guess you might consider the BBC and O'Hagan articles as supporting soft/social/persuasive evidence. However, they strike me as relatively weak on their own and without the type of hard/direct evidence that most folks would consider both reliable and authentic (Ex: a spend from a Satoshi wallet - I don't think we can trust the funky 'signing w/ a key from a satoshi wallet method' at this point). In other words, as has been said by others, proof of Satoshi will come, if ever, via a combination of hard/direct evidence as well as soft/social/persuasive evidence.  Right now, there is no hard/direct evidence; at best, there is some conflicting soft/social/persuasive evidence.

[Singlebyte]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents. 

[funkenstein]

more details here...


and here's 51 patents that he's filed (at EITC) that are published so far.  The reuters article says hundreds are being filed...



IPOGOV UK Links :
Intellectual Property Office
Searchable Patents Journal
Search details
From to           Search details help
Refine    Results per page  
  
UK applications filed
UK applications published
UK applications granted  [snip garbage]

Lol!!  

What a moron.

Thanks for reasons number 2001-2051 that nobody will believe this guy is Satoshi.  

[Bit_Happy]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents.  

Patents are not cheap, I thought Craig Wright had financial trouble that he is trying to dig out of?

[franky1]

with all of them patents
with all the corporations he set up
with all the grabbing funds from government
with all the scamming rather then sharing philosophy.
craig wright is definetly not satoshi..

the real satoshi didnt do non-disclosure-orders, he had open conversations
the real satoshi didnt work on secret projects that will revolution the world and then sell the idea to corporations. he released it freely
the real satoshi didnt patent anything, he made everything open licence.

all i can see craig wright doing is not having a working product or assets and instead is "creating" vapour to sell at a high fee.. definetly not a satoshi personality at all

[franky1]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents.  

Patents are not cheap, I thought Craig Wright had financial trouble that he is trying to dig out of?

scam one person for £6000. create a couple patents. scam 20 people based on promises of 2 patents. get £120,000 to create 40 patents.
set up a corporation under the false belief that the 40 patents can net 1billion (help he priced one business at that very recently) and scam even more people.

mr wright is not a bitcoiner.. he is too involved in grabbing fiat. riding the bitcoin phenomena because governments and financial institutions do not quite understand it, to pretend he is highly involved in it. while holding no bitcoins and simply grabbing fiat at every door he knocks on

shame on him

[helloeverybody]

I dont doubt that craig wright may have known who satoshi was but his bail out of the last chance he had to prove himself was the final nail in the coffin. If he has access to the genesis block or any of satoshis known accounts then just use it and prove it. if you have that much in bitcoin lying about then he wouldnt have such financial troubles. hes a fraud, his lack of proof is proof of that.

[franky1]

I dont doubt that craig wright may have known who satoshi was but his bail out of the last chance he had to prove himself was the final nail in the coffin. If he has access to the genesis block or any of satoshis known accounts then just use it and prove it. if you have that much in bitcoin lying about then he wouldnt have such financial troubles. hes a fraud, his lack of proof is proof of that.

he doesnt. have you not seen the many blogs reddits and forum posts showing the "details" craig displayed as proof to people like gavin and other prominent bitcoiners was simply a 7 year old piece of data anyone can copy and paste out of the blockchain.. it was not unique data using a specific key that was uniquely encrypted in their presence. it was old data that proves nothing.

[Singlebyte]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents.  

Patents are not cheap, I thought Craig Wright had financial trouble that he is trying to dig out of?

Lawyers chase money....if they believe he has a legitimate chance of being awarded these patents, they will have no problem collecting money for their services.  I believe Craig is Satoshi because I don't think any scammer could pull off a scam this monumental and get away without being caught.  It takes too many resources and abilities to make himself appear to be the creator of bitcoin if he is not the real Satoshi.  

[aerobatic]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents.  

Patents are not cheap, I thought Craig Wright had financial trouble that he is trying to dig out of?

scam one person for £6000. create a couple patents. scam 20 people based on promises of 2 patents. get £120,000 to create 40 patents.
set up a corporation under the false belief that the 40 patents can net 1billion (help he priced one business at that very recently) and scam even more people.

mr wright is not a bitcoiner.. he is too involved in grabbing fiat. riding the bitcoin phenomena because governments and financial institutions do not quite understand it, to pretend he is highly involved in it. while holding no bitcoins and simply grabbing fiat at every door he knocks on

shame on him

read the LRB article.   Its a company with backers who are filing the patents.  it may not be craig's doing.  he may not even be involved anymore (after he didn't play ball with them when they wanted him to come out)

[franky1]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents.  

Patents are not cheap, I thought Craig Wright had financial trouble that he is trying to dig out of?

scam one person for £6000. create a couple patents. scam 20 people based on promises of 2 patents. get £120,000 to create 40 patents.
set up a corporation under the false belief that the 40 patents can net 1billion (help he priced one business at that very recently) and scam even more people.

mr wright is not a bitcoiner.. he is too involved in grabbing fiat. riding the bitcoin phenomena because governments and financial institutions do not quite understand it, to pretend he is highly involved in it. while holding no bitcoins and simply grabbing fiat at every door he knocks on

shame on him

read the LRB article.   Its a company with backers who are filing the patents.  it may not be craig's doing.  he may not even be involved anymore (after he didn't play ball with them when they wanted him to come out)

i read the article. more holes then swiss cheese. but with that said
i did like the fantasy fly on the wall "observations" of the day in the hotel when he was being chased. but it could have been wrote more first person to atleast make it sound like craig was telling his narrative of events.. rather than a ghost writer who happened to witness it all from within a closed hotel room where only craig and his mrs were staying.

[Mr Felt]

Damn lot of patents he is going after.  Looks like he has backed himself up with a lot of attorneys and is going for it all.  I am sure more evidence will come forward as he tries to prove claim on these patents.  

Patents are not cheap, I thought Craig Wright had financial trouble that he is trying to dig out of?

scam one person for £6000. create a couple patents. scam 20 people based on promises of 2 patents. get £120,000 to create 40 patents.
set up a corporation under the false belief that the 40 patents can net 1billion (help he priced one business at that very recently) and scam even more people.

mr wright is not a bitcoiner.. he is too involved in grabbing fiat. riding the bitcoin phenomena because governments and financial institutions do not quite understand it, to pretend he is highly involved in it. while holding no bitcoins and simply grabbing fiat at every door he knocks on

shame on him

read the LRB article.   Its a company with backers who are filing the patents.  it may not be craig's doing.  he may not even be involved anymore (after he didn't play ball with them when they wanted him to come out)

i read the article. more holes then swiss cheese. but with that said
i did like the fantasy fly on the wall "observations" of the day in the hotel when he was being chased. but it could have been wrote more first person to atleast make it sound like craig was telling his narrative of events.. rather than a ghost writer who happened to witness it all from within a closed hotel room where only craig and his mrs were staying.

In some ways, this article hurts the case that Craig is Satoshi.

[Kprawn]

Well I am gathering the popcorn to see how this patent thing plays out, because a LOT of companies are dumping millions into Blockchain technology and if he/they are successful, it will cost him even more to

defend these claims in courts.  I always thought Bitcoin and the Blockchain is Public domain and cannot be patented by anyone.  I still think Craig Wright knows more than what he is saying, and we

should have given him more time to prove his claims. 

[franky1]

you dont actually need to spend alot on defending your claim.

first you send a letter of intent. (basically a cease and desist). in there you give the warnings. you highlight how they are infringing the patent and you highlight a settlement amount.
you then warn them if they do not respond or do not cease, the settlement required grows.. you can play this game for months just letting the amounts grow without actually doing anything.

then if you want to take them to court. the majority of the debate is not about the patent claim itself. but about the lack of ceasing and the profits the competitor gained from abusing the patent vs the profits the defendant could have lost due to the competitors.

most of the time it ends up being a pay-off/settlement before it even gets to court. so just sending letters of intent is the majority of the hard work

[jbreher]

This is 0 evidence.
Hal Finney, David Kleiman and Nick Szabo to name some, are still more accurate candidates.

True, there is no conclusive evidence. For any of the above.
Accordingly, it would be inaccurate to claim that Hal Finney, David Kleiman and Nick Szabo to name some, are still more accurate candidates.
However, it could be plausible to claim that Hal Finney, David Kleiman and Nick Szabo to name some, are still more plausible candidates.

I'd lol if future evidence shows CSW to be Satoshi.
I'd lol also if it turned out that CSW was the exploiter of the DAO's recursive withdrawal. <- wild speculation, apropos of nothing.

[jbreher]

Lol!!  

What a moron.

Thanks for reasons number 2001-2051 that nobody will believe this guy is Satoshi.  

In what way does filing Bitcoin-related patents provide reasons that CSW is not Satoshi? There may be a moron in this post, but it does not seem to be CSW.

[jbreher]

hes a fraud, his lack of proof is proof of that.

Well, no. You are displaying an elementary logic fail. Lack of proof for A is never proof of Not-A. You could call it evidence supporting Not-A, but it is in no way proof.

[jbreher]

have you not seen the many blogs reddits and forum posts showing the "details" craig displayed as proof to people like gavin and other prominent bitcoiners was simply a 7 year old piece of data anyone can copy and paste out of the blockchain.

Neither have you. The specifics of the 'proof' demonstrated to Andresen and Matonis have not been shared with the public, AFAIK.

[tmfp]

hes a fraud, his lack of proof is proof of that.

Well, no. You are displaying an elementary logic fail. Lack of proof for A is never proof of Not-A. You could call it evidence supporting Not-A, but it is in no way proof.

That's a bit harsh.
See my sig and also e.g. Copi (yeah, Wikipedia  )

In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence.

Especially when the "evidence" had been provided by someone who would directly benefit from it proving his assertion, it failing to do that and then being effectively withdrawn in what could be described as a "huff".

[franky1]

have you not seen the many blogs reddits and forum posts showing the "details" craig displayed as proof to people like gavin and other prominent bitcoiners was simply a 7 year old piece of data anyone can copy and paste out of the blockchain.

Neither have you. The specifics of the 'proof' demonstrated to Andresen and Matonis have not been shared with the public, AFAIK.

ill just leave this here
MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VT C3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4B

wait.. i must be satoshi too

[jbreher]

hes a fraud, his lack of proof is proof of that.

Well, no. You are displaying an elementary logic fail. Lack of proof for A is never proof of Not-A. You could call it evidence supporting Not-A, but it is in no way proof.

That's a bit harsh.
See my sig and also e.g. Copi (yeah, Wikipedia  )

Not harsh at all. And fully consistent with your sig (I don't know what Copi is). Lack of proof for A is never proof of Not-A. Period.

You can call it evidence supporting a _conclusion_ of Not-A. I'd even agree with you. But it ain't proof.

[jbreher]

have you not seen the many blogs reddits and forum posts showing the "details" craig displayed as proof to people like gavin and other prominent bitcoiners was simply a 7 year old piece of data anyone can copy and paste out of the blockchain.

Neither have you. The specifics of the 'proof' demonstrated to Andresen and Matonis have not been shared with the public, AFAIK.

ill just leave this here
MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VT C3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4B

wait.. i must be satoshi too

Show me where either Andresen or Matonis have indicated that the 'proof' they were given was the replay trickery to which you refer.

Oh, you mean you can't find any such claim? Interesting.

[tmfp]

hes a fraud, his lack of proof is proof of that.

Well, no. You are displaying an elementary logic fail. Lack of proof for A is never proof of Not-A. You could call it evidence supporting Not-A, but it is in no way proof.

That's a bit harsh.
See my sig and also e.g. Copi (yeah, Wikipedia  )

Not harsh at all. And fully consistent with your sig (I don't know what Copi is). Lack of proof for A is never proof of Not-A. Period.

You can call it evidence supporting a _conclusion_ of Not-A. I'd even agree with you. But it ain't proof.

Copi's an Irving not an it, wrote "Introduction to Logic".
My view, fwiw, is that by failure to provide proof for A (that CW=SN), in this case Not-A is assumed as default as it was before the claim was made, as A only ever existed in the claim, subsequently unproven, made by the potentially benefiting party.
One logical? step further would be that by failure of proof for A, the likelihood of Not-A is increased.
But yeah, I give you that CW≠SN isn't 100% proven, although neither is (insert any name)≠SN.

[Minor Miner]

So, why could he not access the address and send the bitcoin dust back to gavin as he said he would from Satoshi's account?

Don't you think a more like scenario is that Craig is in SERIOUS legal jeopardy for what appears to be a tax scam and wanted to be "outed" as satohsi so he could justify his right to patent and then sell all the patents to that company to get a lot of money fast (and save his bacon)?

[jbreher]

So, why could he not access the address and send the bitcoin dust back to gavin as he said he would from Satoshi's account?

While we know that he _did_not_, we do not know whether he _could_not_. Though admittedly that would be a plausible conclusion.

Don't you think a more like scenario is that Craig is in SERIOUS legal jeopardy for what appears to be a tax scam and wanted to be "outed" as satohsi so he could justify his right to patent and then sell all the patents to that company to get a lot of money fast (and save his bacon)?

I don't think enough facts are in evidence to call that scenario more likely. There is insufficient data to quantify probabilities. Again, I'll grant you plausible.

[Minor Miner]

So, why could he not access the address and send the bitcoin dust back to gavin as he said he would from Satoshi's account?

While we know that he _did_not_, we do not know whether he _could_not_. Though admittedly that would be a plausible conclusion.

Don't you think a more like scenario is that Craig is in SERIOUS legal jeopardy for what appears to be a tax scam and wanted to be "outed" as satohsi so he could justify his right to patent and then sell all the patents to that company to get a lot of money fast (and save his bacon)?

I don't think enough facts are in evidence to call that scenario more likely. There is insufficient data to quantify probabilities. Again, I'll grant you plausible.

Let's ask William of Ockham what he thinks on the matter.....

Yup, Craig ain't satoshi.      QED.   End of scam attempt.

[franky1]

have you not seen the many blogs reddits and forum posts showing the "details" craig displayed as proof to people like gavin and other prominent bitcoiners was simply a 7 year old piece of data anyone can copy and paste out of the blockchain.

Neither have you. The specifics of the 'proof' demonstrated to Andresen and Matonis have not been shared with the public, AFAIK.

ill just leave this here
MEUCIQDBKn1Uly8m0UyzETObUSL4wYdBfd4ejvtoQfVcNCIK4AIgZmMsXNQWHvo6KDd2Tu6euEl13VT C3ihl6XUlhcU+fM4B

wait.. i must be satoshi too

Show me where either Andresen or Matonis have indicated that the 'proof' they were given was the replay trickery to which you refer.

Oh, you mean you can't find any such claim? Interesting.

search "gavin matonis wright block 9" to see lots of people discussing how wright showed them a signature that is validated by the address held in block 9

then look at the address that can verify the MEUCIQDBK... sig.. wait for it             wait for it                here comes the revelation..
Bam
you have finally caught up with the whole situation

[hikedoon]

Hmm. You may have had more activity if you entitled your post "Evidence of Wright maybe being Satoshi" or some such.

<I found it a compelling read...>

 I found it a compelling read too but it left me thinking he was a conman that tried to bite of more than he could chew.
 It took me 5 minutes to learn how to verify my address by signing a message and I'm clueless with computers.
 So it seems extremely fishy to me that Wright made such a palaver of providing proof.
 And this "trust holding the bitcoins" business seems like it's straight out of a crappy b movie plot.
     
 

 
 
 

[practicaldreamer]

OK - 1) who is this Calvin guy in Antigua, and whats his role ?   2) who are the trustees ?  3) where does Ross Ulbricht come into it exactly ?



What a fantastic film this is going to make - one day, when we know the ending.

How incredibly moving the story of Dave Kleiman, his relationship to Craig Wright, and his ultimate demise (shortly before the price took off).

You couldn't make this shit up.

[Hide_ip112]

I don't care who exactly created the bitcoin, however I want that after the owner/creator of the bitcoin is already present and claiming patent rights bitcoin. Bitcoin became stable and better yet, because the bitcoin has some constraints in several improvement and its system

[chek2fire]

not again with this scammer!

[countryfree]

OK, still no conclusive evidence but it's clear M. Wright is not your average scammer. He's hugely familiar with everything BTC. If he's not Satoshi, he has spent months learning about it, so much that he convince plenty others that he's the man.

[chek2fire]

OK, still no conclusive evidence but it's clear M. Wright is not your average scammer. He's hugely familiar with everything BTC. If he's not Satoshi, he has spent months learning about it, so much that he convince plenty others that he's the man.

lol hahahahaha ahhahahjhahahahahahahahahahahah   you dont really believe that this guy has nothing to do with bitcoin? He is scammer

[franky1]

OK, still no conclusive evidence but it's clear M. Wright is not your average scammer. He's hugely familiar with everything BTC. If he's not Satoshi, he has spent months learning about it, so much that he convince plenty others that he's the man.

if i was to say that i could give you tens of millions from the government. and then hundreds of millions from private investors. wouldnt you spend more than a passing glance at all the satoshi quotes and email leaks that are publicly available

[jbreher]

search "gavin matonis wright block 9" to see lots of people discussing how wright showed them a signature that is validated by the address held in block 9

No. How 'bout you post a link to either Andresen or Matonis state that the evidence they were presented with by Wright may have been the same as the spoof.

Unless you can, then I believe I am fully caught up with the situation.

[RocketSingh]

search "gavin matonis wright block 9" to see lots of people discussing how wright showed them a signature that is validated by the address held in block 9

No. How 'bout you post a link to either Andresen or Matonis state that the evidence they were presented with by Wright may have been the same as the spoof.

Unless you can, then I believe I am fully caught up with the situation.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4hfyyo/gavin_can_you_please_detail_all_parts_of_the/d2plygg

Craig signed a message that I chose ("Gavin's favorite number is eleven. CSW" if I recall correctly) using the private key from block number 1.

That signature was copied on to a clean usb stick I brought with me to London, and then validated on a brand-new laptop with a freshly downloaded copy of electrum.

I was not allowed to keep the message or laptop (fear it would leak before Official Announcement).

I don't have an explanation for the funky OpenSSL procedure in his blog post.

[chek2fire]

are any serious to continue support this hoaxer after what happen before one month? lol 

[jbreher]

search "gavin matonis wright block 9" to see lots of people discussing how wright showed them a signature that is validated by the address held in block 9

No. How 'bout you post a link to either Andresen or Matonis state that the evidence they were presented with by Wright may have been the same as the spoof.

Unless you can, then I believe I am fully caught up with the situation.

https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4hfyyo/gavin_can_you_please_detail_all_parts_of_the/d2plygg

Craig signed a message that I chose ("Gavin's favorite number is eleven. CSW" if I recall correctly) using the private key from block number 1.

That signature was copied on to a clean usb stick I brought with me to London, and then validated on a brand-new laptop with a freshly downloaded copy of electrum.

I was not allowed to keep the message or laptop (fear it would leak before Official Announcement).

I don't have an explanation for the funky OpenSSL procedure in his blog post.

Was that supposed to be a reply to my inquiry? Because it is not.

[iv4n]

with all of them patents
with all the corporations he set up
with all the grabbing funds from government
with all the scamming rather then sharing philosophy.
craig wright is definetly not satoshi..

the real satoshi didnt do non-disclosure-orders, he had open conversations
the real satoshi didnt work on secret projects that will revolution the world and then sell the idea to corporations. he released it freely
the real satoshi didnt patent anything, he made everything open licence.

all i can see craig wright doing is not having a working product or assets and instead is "creating" vapour to sell at a high fee.. definetly not a satoshi personality at all

Very nicely said, I think you pointed very nice arguments why CW can never be real Satoshi. I see logic in your words, you explained something with simple words for everyone to understand.
From the first moment's I doubt that he is Satoshi, and how time is passing "everyone is Satoshi" starting to have more sense in my head.
What you just said is something that every rightful man should follow!

[numismatist]

are any serious to continue support this hoaxer after what happen before one month? lol 

Nope. He is "nice to have" as a panic asset, but not much more.

[BrewMaster]

no matter how many formula craig wright writes on glass and how many long 10 page, 1000 page articles are written about him being satoshi i will listen and believe if only i see a proper signed message the rest is just waste of time

[TofuLover]

after marked as a scumbag with his previous videos which using trick to faking the owning rights,i'm sure only idiots would trust him

[BankrJr]

Has anyone noticed that the CSW made a wish on the Genesis Block?  50 btc of it can't be moved from the Genesis block but the real Satoshi would be able to pull that extra 16 btc out.

Check out the public note: https://blockchain.info/tx/94da714faefee60be3066ec3326f158d4872996975766e25f39c83c0317315aa

Maybe this wasn't CSW but he sure seems to like a lot of attention as opposed to Satoshi that was obviously private about his identity.

[practicaldreamer]

Was it absolutely necessary to put the BTC in trust ? I know the idea was that it would prevent their use (even in desperation) till 2020 , so as not to spook the market.
But what would be the real effect of moving some of the Satoshi coins on the market ? I'm not talking about dumping the lot, more 50 here, 100 there maybe ? Would it really be so catostrophic over the medium to long term ? Wasn't tying them up in a trust overkill ?
Does it mean that the coins should rightfully never move for fear of spooking the market ? Seems daft to me. Bitcoin is established now, its sailing by its own steam.

Hey, maybe we could start a collection for Craig. I think Franky1 should start the ball rolling.

Failing that, what do the trustees think ? We know you are out there somewhere